4: Definition of Aprastutapraśaṃsā Alaṃkāra

Aprastutapraśaṃsā is a famous arthālaṃkāra in Sanskrit Poetics. It is a complete reverse from samāsokti as far as the features are concerned. In samāsokti a non-contextual or ‘aprastuta’ is comprehended from the description of the contextual or ‘prastuta’, whereas in aprastutapraśaṃsā the description of the non-contextual results in the comprehension of the contextual. Again, samāsokti is created through terseness in expression whereas aprastutapraśaṃsā is a praise or description done indirectly.

Bhāmaha defines aprastutapraśaṃsā as a figure of speech where a commendatory statement is made about an object which is removed from the principal theme of description but conveys with it a sense of principal theme—

adhikārādapetasya vastuno'nyasya yāstutiḥ/
aprastutapraśaṃseti sācaivaṃ kathyate yathā//
  —Kāvyālaṃkāra (of Bhāmaha) 3.28.

Udbhaṭa follows Bhāmaha with his definition of aprastutapraśaṃsā and also puts forth a new feature of the figure of speech, i.e., ‘prastutārthānubandhinī’—

adhikārādapetasya vastuno'nyasya yāstutiḥ/
aprastutapraśaṃseyaṃ prastutārthānubandhinī//
  —Kāvyālaṃkārasārasaṃgraha (of Udbhaṭā) 5.8.

The commentator Indurāja in his commentary ‘Laghuvṛtti’ clearly points out the implication of the word ‘prastutārthānubandhinī’ in this definition—

na caivamapi tasyāunmattapralāpaprakhyatāyataḥ sākenacit svājanyena
prastutamarthamanudhnāti/ tadutaṃ prastutārthānubandhinīti/
  —Laghuvṛtti, Kāvyālaṃkārasārasaṃgraha (of Udbhaṭā) 5.8.

Indurāja comments that if the ‘prastuta’ is driven away and in its place the ‘aprastuta’ is elaborately described then it will have no value. The statement made in this way can be compared with the worthless ravings of a lunatic who does not even understand what he has to describe. But this is not the case with aprastutapraśaṃsā because in aprastutapraśaṃsā the statement about the ‘aprastuta’ also brings with it the principal theme of description by means of suggestion. It is also clear that in aprastutapraśaṃsā the statement made contains an idea of the relation (svājanya) between the ‘aprastuta’ and the ‘prastuta’. This ‘svājanya’ can be identified with either ‘kāvya-kāraṇasambandha’ or ‘sāmānya-viśeṣa-sambandha’ or ‘upamānopameyabhāvasambandha’. Owing to this relation the ‘prastutārtha’ can be comprehended by implication.

Daṇḍin defines aprastutapraśaṃsā in a very different way—

aprastutapraśaṃsāsyādaprakānteṣu yāstutiḥ/
  —Kāvya-prakāśa (of Mammaṭa) 2.340.

This definition simply points out that aprastutapraśaṃsā is the praise of any ‘aprastuta’ object.

The commentator Jīvānanda Vidyāsāgara brings out the real purport of this definition—

yāstutiḥ prastutasya nindārthamityadh yāhāryam/ tathāca aprastutatvena
prastutasya nindāsūcanamaprastutapraśaṃseti/

So, according to Daṇḍin, the aprastutapraśaṃsā is the praise of the ‘aprastuta’ with a view to condemn the ‘prastuta’. This notion is also clarified in the following example verse^[1] .

Bhojarāja follows Daṇḍin and defines aprastutapraśaṃsā as—

aprastutapraśaṃsāsyādastotavyasya yāstutiḥ/
  —Sarasvatī-kaṇṭhābharaṇa (of Bhoja) 4.52.

But the majorities of the rhetoricians do not seem to accept the views of Daṇḍin and Bhojarāja about this feature of aprastutapraśaṃsā.

Vāmana defines aprastutapraśaṃsā in a different way from that of his predecessors—

kiñciduktāvaprastutapraśaṃsā/
  —Kāvyālaṃkārasūtravṛtti (of Vāmana) 4.3.4.

In the following vṛtti he explains the definition as—

upameyasya kiñcilliṅgatvena uktau samānavastunyāse aprastutapraśaṃsā/
  —Kāvyālaṃkārasūtravṛtti (of Vāmana) 4.3.4.

According to Vāmana, when there is just a slight mention of the object of comparison or ‘aprastuta’ by means of certain hint or implication (liṅga), it is called aprastutapraśaṃsā.

Again, Vāmana tries to explain aprastutapraśaṃsā in the true sense of the term—

aprastutārthasya praśaṃsanamaprastutapraśaṃsā/
  —Kāvyālaṃkārasūtravṛtti (of Vāmana) 4.3.4.

—Aprastutapraśaṃsā literally means praise or description of the indirect or non-contextual.

Vāmana elongates this definition with the help of the following example verse—

lāvaṇyasindhuraparaiva hi kācaneyaṃ
yatrotpalāni śaśināsaha saṃplavante/
unmajjati dviradakumbhataṭīca yatra
yatrāpare kadalikāṇḍamṛṇāladaṇḍāḥ//
  —Kāvyālaṃkārasūtravṛtti (of Vāmana) 4.3.4.

—She is a peculiar ocean of beauty. Here the lotuses float along with the moon. The temples of elephants are issuing forth out of this ocean and the stem of the plantain and the lotus stalks are also found here.

This verse is supposed to be an exclamation of a lover about his lady love to his friend. Here the object of comparison is a beautiful woman. This object of comparison is slightly mentioned by the pronoun ‘iyam’ in the first line. In this verse, by the praise of the ‘aprastuta’ objects such as ‘utpala’ (lotus) etc the ‘prastutas’ or ‘upameyas’ such as ‘eyes’ etc are implied.

The Kāmadhenu commentator justifies the existence of aprastutapraśaṃsā in the example verse in the following way—

atra lāvaṇyapadārthenaikadeśenopameyān āṃ nayanādīnāmuktāvutpalādīnā-
maprastutānāṃ praśaṃsanādaprastutapraśaṃsānāmālaṃkāraḥ/
  —Kāmadhenu, Kāvyālaṃkārasūtravṛtti (of Vāmana) 4.3.4.

Rudraṭa has omitted aprastutapraśaṃsā in the list of his figures of speech. Agnipurāṇa has also omitted the treatment of this figure.

Ānandavardhana has mentioned three types (elaborated to five types in the vṛtti and Locana) of aprastutapraśaṃsā in the first chapter of his work while discussing the features of dhvani. Ānandavardhana clearly points out that in all these varieties and sub-varieties of aprastutapraśaṃsā if the suggested sense gets more importance than the subjected sense it will be regarded as an instance of dhvani. Otherwise it will be regarded as alaṃkāras only^[2] .

Kuntaka defines aprastutapraśaṃsā in two verses in a detailed manner—

aprastuto'pi vicchittiṃ prastutasyāvatārayan/
yatra tat sāmyamāśritya sambandhāntarameva vā//
vākyārtho'satyabhūto vāprāpyate varṇanīyatām/
aprastutapraśaṃseti kathitāsāvalaṃkṛtiḥ//
  —Vakrokti-jīvita (of Kuntaka) 3.25-26.

—He describes and illustrates four varieties of aprastutapraśaṃsā—

(i) sāmyasamāśrayanādvākyāntarbhūtaprastutapadārthapraśaṃsā,

(ii) samāśrayaṇātmasakalavākyāvyāpakaprastutapadārthapraśaṃsā,

(iii) sambandhāntarāśrayaṇādvākyāntarbhūtaprastutapadārthapraśaṃsā and

(iv) sambandhāntarāśrayaṇādsakalavākyavyāpākaprastutapadārthapraśaṃsā.

Kuntaka has cited the illustrative verse (lāvaṇyasindhuraparaiva etc) mentioned by Vāmana under the first category of aprastutapraśaṃsā.

Mammaṭa defines aprastutapraśaṃsā as—

aprastutapraśaṃsāyāsāsaiva prastutāśrayā/
  —Kāvya-prakāśa (of Mammaṭa) 10.151.

—In the vṛtti he clarifies this definition—

aprākaraṇikasyābhidhānena prākaraṇikasyākṣepo'prastutapraśaṃsā/
  —Kāvya-prakāśa (of Mammaṭa) 10.151.(vṛtti).

—Where the description of the aprastuta or aprākaraṇika leads to the comprehension of the prastuta or prākaraṇika, it is called aprastutapraśaṃsā.

Mammaṭa is the first rhetorician to clearly point out the five common varieties of aprastutapraśaṃsā^[3] .

Ruyyaka follows Mammaṭāin stating the five varieties of aprastutapraśaṃsā along with the general feature of the figure—comprehension of the prastuta through the description of the aprastuta—

aprastutāt sāmānyaviśeṣabhāve kāryakāraṇabhāve sārūpye ca prastutapratītā-
vaprastutapraśaṃsā/
  —Alaṃkārasarvasva (of Ruyyaka) p-104.

—He also illustrates these five varieties in details.

Hemacandra has mentioned aprastutapraśaṃsā under the figure anyokti.

He delineates this figure as—

sāmānyaviśeṣe kārye kāraṇe prastute tadanyasya tulye tulyasya coktiranyoktiḥ/
  —Kāvyānuśāsana (of Hemacandra) 6.8.

—It is clear from the above definition that Hemacandra has closely followed Mammaṭa and Ruyyaka in specifying the figure. It is also worth mentioning that rhetoricians like Rudraṭāand VāgbhaṭāII have furnished quite different definitions of anyokti. Vāgbhaṭa II has even put forth separate definitions of anyokti and aprastutapraśaṃsā.

Vāgbhaṭa I has provided a simple definition of aprastutapraśaṃsā—

praśaṃsākriyate yatrāprastutasyāpi vastunaḥ/
aprastutapraśaṃsāṃ tāmāhuḥ kṛtadhiyo yathā//
  —VKL. 4.134.

—Vāgbhaṭa II has termed aprastutapraśaṃsā in close similarity to Vāmana as—

upameyasya kiñciduktāvaprastutapraśaṃsā/
  —Kāvyānuśāsana (of Vāgbhaṭā II) Ch-III, p-36.

—He cites the same illustrative verse used by Vāmana but in a rearranged manner.

Jayadeva^[4] , Vidyādhara^[5] and Vidyānātha^[6] have followed Mammaṭā closely in stating the general characteristics of aprastutapraśaṃsā. Viśvanātha, like Mammaṭā, has categorically mentioned the five varieties of the figure—

kvacidviśeṣaḥ sāmānyāt sāmānyaṃ vāviśeṣataḥ/
kāryānnimittaṃ kāryaṃ ca hetoratha samāt samam//
aprastutāt prastutaṃ ced gamyate pañcadhātataḥ/
aprastutapraśaṃsāsyāt..//
  —SD 10.58.

—Jagannātha’s definition of the figure is also in accordance to his predecessors—

aprastutena vyavahāreṇasādṛsyādivakṣyamānaprakārānyatamaprakāreṇa
prastutavyavahāro yatra praśasyate sāaprastutapraśaṃsā/
  —Rasa-gaṅgādhara (of Jagannātha) Ch-II, p-402.

—He has noted that the ‘praśaṃsā’ as regards to the aprastutapraśaṃsā means description in general and not the praise of the aprastuta—

aprastutapraśaṃsanaṃ ca varṇanāmātram, na tu stutiḥ/
  —Rasa-gaṅgādhara (of Jagannātha) Ch-II, p-402.

—Appyayya Dīkṣīta^[7] , Kavikarṇapūra^[8] and Viśveśvara Paṇḍita^[9] have treated the figure in the same manner. Viśveśvara has only used ‘vyāpyavyāpaka’ in place of sāmānyaviśeṣa.

We can sketch out some of the common characteristic features of aprastutapraśaṃsā from the doctrines of the Sanskrit rhetoricians.

They are as follows—

i) Aprastutapraśaṃsā is the description of the aprastuta.

ii) The aim of the description is to suggest the prastuta.

iii) The comprehension or the suggestion of the prastuta can be formed by upamānopameyabhāvasambandha, sāmānyaviśeṣabhāvasambandha, kāryakāraṇabhāvasambandha etc.

iv) The rhetoricians have generally given more emphasis on pointing out the varieties of aprastutapraśaṃsā rather than furnishing its comprehensive definition.

v) Daṇḍin and Bhoja have descri bed aprastutapraśaṃsā as the praise of the aprastuta whereas later rhetoricians have regarded it as merely the description of the aprastuta.

Vāmana has treated aprastutapraśaṃsā with unparallel terseness. He delineates it as a slender mention of the aprastuta and not an elaborate description of it. This puts emphasis on the suggestiveness of the figure. He also omits detailed discussion on the varieties of the figure. His illustrative verse of the figure is however recognized as a popular illustration of aprastutapraśaṃsā by later rhetoricians.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

sukhaṃ jīvanti hariṇāvaneṣvaparasevinaḥ/
annai'yatnasulabhaistṛṇadarbhāṅkurādibhiḥ//
  —Kāvyādarśa (of Daṇḍin) 2.341.

—The antelopes who do not serve others live happily in the forest on food like grass, darbha and seedlings which are easily obtained without any effort.

—Here the speaker praises the ‘aprastuta’, i.e. the life of an antelope. The verse contains an inner implication of self-condemnation.

[2]:

aprastutapraśaṃsāyāmapi yadāsāmānyaviśeṣabhāvānnimittanimitti-bhāvādvābhidheyapratīyamānayoḥ samameva prādhānyam / yadātāvat sāmānyasyāprastutasyābhidhīyamānasya prākaraṇikena viśeṣeṇa pratīyamānena saṃbandhastadāviśeṣapratītau satyāmapi prādhānyena tasya sāmānyenāvinābhāvāt sāmānyasyāpi prādhānyam / yadāpi viśeṣasya sāmānyaniṣṭhatvaṃ tadāpi sāmānyas ya prādhānye sāmānye sarvaviśeṣāṇāmantarbhāvādviśeṣasyāpi prādhānyam / nimittanimittibhāve cāyameva nyāyaḥ / yadātu sārūpyamātravaśenāprastutapraśaṃsāyām-aprakṛtaprakṛtayoḥ saṃbandhastadāpyaprastutasya sarūpasyābhidhīya-mānasya prādhānyenāvivakṣāyāṃ dhyānāvevāntaḥpātaḥ / itarathā tvalaṃkārāntarameva/
  —Dhvanyāloka (of Ānandavardhana) 1.13. vṛtti.

[3]:

kārye nimitte sāmānye viśeṣe prastute sati/
tadanyasya vacastulye tulyasyeti ca pañcadhā//
  —Kāvya-prakāśa (of Mammaṭa) 10.152.

[4]:

aprastutapraśaṃsāsyāt sāyatra prastutānugā/
kāryakāraṇasāmānyaviśeṣāderasau matā//
  —Candrāloka (of Jayadeva) 5.66.

[5]:

sāmānyaviśeṣatve sārūpye kāryakāraṇatve ca/
aprastutapraśaṃsānirdiṣṭāprastutasya gamyatve/
  —Ekāvalī (of Vidyādhara) 8.27.

[6]:

aprastutasya kathanāt prastutaṃ yatra gamyate/
aprastutapraśaṃseyaṃ svārūpyādiniyantritā//
  —Pratāparudrayaśobhūṣaṇa (of Vidyānātha) Chapter-VIII, p-443.

[7]:

aprastutapraśaṃsāsyāt sāyatra prastutāśrayā/
  —Kuvalayānanda (of Appayyadīkṣīta) 27.66.

[8]:

aprāsaṅgikasya vāk prāsaṅgikakathāyāṃ syādaprastutapraśaṃsanam/
kāryakāraṇasāmānyaviśeṣeṣu tadanyagīḥ/
prastuteṣu ca tulye ca tulyagīḥ pañcadhaiva tat//
  —Alaṃkāra-kaustubha (of Kavikarṇāpūra) 8.254-255.

[9]:

aprastutapraśaṃsāprakṛtapratipattiretayāyatra/
kārye hetau vyāpyavyāpakayoranyagīḥ sametasya//
  —Alaṃkārakaustubha (of Viśveśvara Paṇḍita) 28. p-268.